Monday, March 21, 2016

The secret to successful conflict is knowing what you want to get out of the engagement before the opening bell.

Some time ago, my then local dry cleaner shredded the back panel of two of my dress shirts. I’m not talking about a slight tear. I mean this was full post-bear-mauling Leo DiCaprio. Obviously, something went very wrong in the back room of the Bradlee Dry Cleaners.

But when I brought them back for restitution—or at the very least a heartfelt apology—the proprietor said that I had dropped them off in that condition.

I went Hulk-O-Rama so fast and furiously that I popped the collar button off the shirt I was wearing.

Didn’t matter. He wasn’t budging. As I walked out in defeat (three shirts to the wind, as it were), I vowed never to step foot in that shop again! Nine years later, they went out of business, which I like to think I had some small hand in.

Fast forward to last week when, running late for a breakfast meeting, I saw that my freshly dry-cleaned shirt had a large grease stain running down the left sleeve from the elbow to the cuff. I grabbed a second shirt and it had a stain in the same pattern on the same arm.

Was I angry? You betcha. But this time I was ready. All I wanted from my dry cleaner was an acknowledgement that they stained my shirts. And in order to get that, I took the issue off the table.

“Hey, these two shirts both came back with these identical stains.”

“Hmmmm.”

“Now, I’m not sure how they got there, but I would imagine it happened during the dry cleaning process. It’s possible, of course, that I brought them in with these stains.”

“Hmmmm.”

“It doesn’t matter how it happened, really. I just wanted to bring it to your attention in case you had a mechanical problem that you should check on before this happens to someone else.”

“I’ll refund the cost of cleaning these two shirts.”

Victory!

Now, if I had centered the conflict on who actually wrecked my shirts, her natural reaction would have been to defend herself. And—once our respective perspectives were established—any forceful argument I made would be met by an equal and opposite forceful argument from her.

Call it Newton’s Third Law of Emotion.

But by setting aside the very point I needed to win—and even interjecting a smidgen of her perspective—I completely de-fanged her opposition. And then I sealed the deal by suggesting that I only brought the issue up out of concern for her other customers. Check and mate.

They may not have paid for the shirts they ruined, but they at least fessed up topossibly having had something to do with it. And that’s gold, Jerry. Gold!

Friday, March 4, 2016

Machines have two primary functions: they perform the task they
were built for or, failing that, they serve as emotionless objects through
which we can vent our pent-up rage and frustration.

Who among us hasn’t wanted to go all Office Space on the company printer? We slam our
car doors, punch parking meters, and throw our remotes against the wall. (You
guys do that, right?) And we take out our aggression without a hint of remorse
because these are victimless drubbings. We’re thrashing machines, not people.

But what if that machine looked a lot like Dave from Shipping
(or at least had Dave’s stumpy-legged gait) and you saw him being tormented by
Rick the floor manager as he was trying to pick up a box? You’d feel some
anxiety. Really, you would. See for yourself, starting at 1:22.

You see what Rick is doing with that hockey stick? It’s inhuman.
Watch as Rick pushes the poor bastard onto his “face” at 2:05 and tell me you
don’t feel anything. You can almost hear what Dave is thinking as he slowly
rises to his foot-pads.

Then, after he pauses to collect himself, you can see Dave
consider and decide against extracting robotic revenge, instead walking slowly
out the door--which he does not slam because, being a robot, he isn’t mad. We
are. At Rick, for tormenting a machine.

It’s a natural response. Even Martin Shkreli would
feel for that robot because it seems human. It’s just how we’re wired.
According to research by
University of Chicago psychologist Nicholas Epley, anthropomorphism “reflects a
deep drive to form social connections, even with objects made of metal and
wire.” And this drive, he found, increases as our sense of social isolation
grows.

And if research from Duke University and the University of
Arizona is any indication, anthropomorphism is going to skyrocket as social
media (ironically) makes us all feel more socially isolated.

So keep that in mind as you try to connect with your audiences.
Rather than speak of the sweeping societal benefit of your organization,
product, or service, describe instead how your organization, product, or service
helps Dave in shipping.

As novelist Richard Price said,
“The bigger the issue, the smaller you write. Remember that. You don't write
about the horrors of war. No. You write about a kid's burnt socks lying on the
road. You pick the smallest manageable part of the big thing, and you work off
the resonance.”